The African Democratic Congress has accused the Nigerian Bar Association of taking sides in the political dispute involving the opposition party following its decision to initiate disciplinary proceedings against lawyer and politician, Kalu Kalu, over his comments about Justice Peter Lifu.
The opposition party warned the NBA against allowing itself to be used as a tool in what it described as a political campaign against opposition figures, insisting that the Association should be more concerned about allegations of judicial misconduct and threats to the independence of the judiciary.
In a statement issued on Saturday by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the ADC questioned the NBA’s decision to move against Kalu, arguing that similar concerns had previously been raised by the Court of Appeal over Justice Lifu’s conduct.
The party specifically cited a June 2026 ruling of the Court of Appeal, which it said described the judge’s conduct as the “highest form of judicial impertinence” and referenced a Supreme Court precedent that characterised such conduct as judicial rascality.
“Why is the NBA only now finding its voice because a politician, who also happens to be a lawyer, has said something that some people find uncomfortable? What has Kalu Kalu said about Justice Peter Lifu that the Court of Appeal has not already said?” the statement queried.
The ADC expressed concern that the NBA had not demonstrated similar urgency when the appellate court reportedly raised serious questions about the conduct of a judicial officer.
While acknowledging the Association’s historical contributions to democracy and the rule of law, the party cautioned against actions that could create the impression that it was aligning with the ruling party against opposition interests.
“The Association must be careful not to allow itself to be perceived as throwing its hat into the political ring on the side of a ruling party that already boasts openly of hijacking our judicial institutions and the Nigerian Bar,” it said.
The opposition party maintained that public confidence in the judiciary was undermined by alleged judicial misconduct and unethical practices among some legal practitioners, rather than criticism directed at judicial officers.
It argued that the NBA should prioritise addressing allegations of compromised judicial processes instead of taking disciplinary action against Kalu for expressing his political views.
“It is not Kalu’s words that smear the judiciary. What discredits the Bench and the Bar is the conduct of conscienceless judges like Lifu and equally conscienceless lawyers who are alleged to operate a network of client judges in the service of conscienceless politicians in power,” the statement added.
The ADC further insisted that the NBA must remain independent and avoid being perceived as part of a political coalition working against opposition parties.
According to the party, defending the integrity of the judiciary should not translate into suppressing legitimate criticism or demanding silence in the face of alleged injustice.
“The NBA cannot demand respect for the judiciary while appearing indifferent to conduct that brings the judiciary into disrepute. Respect for the courts must never become a requirement for silence in the face of injustice,” it stated.
Although the party agreed that lawyers should exercise restraint in their public comments, it maintained that such restraint should not prevent them from speaking against perceived wrongdoing.
“We agree that lawyers must exercise restraint. But there is no respectful way to address evil, and the NBA cannot teach us one,” the ADC declared.
